London vs San Francisco – back and forth
1–10 of 132 posts
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#2Thankfully both became great tech hubs, so you can easily avoid them.
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#3Regarding the "how did these guys raise so much money?" thing. I'm afraid this is mostly just a sampling bias - one that I've experienced as well.
Here's why: the people who forever can't find good talented engineers are usually the bad companies with bad ideas. Getting capital from MBA-educated VC's isn't that challenging or any significant validation of success (although still a notable one).
So you are more likely to come across a large number of the crazy ones who can't find engineers/designers during your recruiting phase coming from out of town.
Once you build a network you will start to be invited to work for good startups and smart people. Good companies recruit via networks until they reach scale.
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#4In London, tech does not rule the city. No single industry does. Not even finance.
Apart from the City, which is quite literally ruled by the finance industry. [1]
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#5In London, tech does not rule the city. No single industry does. Not even finance. Apart from the City, which is quite literally ruled by the finance industry. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Elections
The City is one small area where hardly anyone actually lives.
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#6Very interesting read, but also very sad. I think the local authorities in San Francisco are the ones that have to wake up and invest quickly into growing up the infrastructure to accommodate the influx of talent. Otherwise the exodus will hurt everyone and it's already happening (e.g. http://qz.com/627414/tech-workers-are-increasingly-looking-t...)
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#7In London, tech does not rule the city. No single industry does. Not even finance. Apart from the City, which is quite literally ruled by the finance industry. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Elections
The City is one small area where hardly anyone actually lives.
Approximately 7,000 residents [1], but over 400,000 employees. [2]
[1] http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-plan...
[2] http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-research-an...
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#8In London, tech does not rule the city. No single industry does. Not even finance. Apart from the City, which is quite literally ruled by the finance industry. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Elections
Yeah, but the The City is a tiny pebble in comparison to London. I'm sure there are plenty of places in London that size that are dominated by one industry (though none with their own laws.)
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#9He thinks SF is multicultural? By that standard Oakland must be Africa.
Re: London vs San Francisco – back and forth
#10In London, tech does not rule the city. No single industry does. Not even finance. Apart from the City, which is quite literally ruled by the finance industry. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London#Elections
The City is one small area where hardly anyone actually lives.
How is this different to SF (the 'city' in London isn't actually that big and smaller if you mean 'the square mile'), I assume most people commute to SF in as well?
It's not an apt comparison as firms are geographically distributed all over the bay area.